voluntary repossesion - ex forged signature

clayer1970

Hi all, I'm new here but will try and keep this as brief as poss.

My hubby was married before and they had a mortgage. When she ended the marriage he moved from Cornwall to Somerset. Neither of them paid the mortgage for three months. Hubby called his ex and offered to take on the house and get tenants in to help pay. At which point he was told that it was too late and she had handed the keys back to the lender.

This was in 2011 and she went bankrupt almost immediately, leaving hubby owing the whole 50k! Debt collection telephoned us and hubby told them that he hadn't signed anything and could the send him evidence. We have had the signed form and it's pretty obvious she's forged his signature. Also because of the dates he could not have been in Cornwall to sign at anytime during that week, and he has evidence of that via his Facebook entries when he had family to stay.

We are clueless as to what to do. We know it's a criminal offence but they have three kids (albeit grown up ones) and we're also aware that it will cause massive issues there. We don't want to see her in prison, but neither do we think we should be lumbered with 50k debt because of her deception.

Any advice is very much appreciated.

laurel7172

As I understand it, if she is bankrupt, your husband is liable for the full debt, no matter who said what, or signed what, when. Your husband stopped paying the mortgage and knew the house was being repossessed. However morally or legally wrong the forged signature, it doesn't take away his liability for the debt. Google "joint and several liability".

ALIBOBSY

To be fair if she hadn't signed the document and handed the keys back, unless he had cleared the arrears and started to pay the mortgage himself the bank would have repossesed and the debt would then be higher as there would be extra fees on top as well.

Unfortunately they were both responsible for the mortgage so he couldn't expect to just stop paying. You could report her for fraud, but it wouldn't wipe the debt as the banks will still say he owes it, sorry.

Does he have a house and assets now? If not it may be worth having a chat to the debt charities to consider if he should go bankrupt himself.

Good Luck

Ali x

clayer1970

He couldn't pay the mortgage for the first three months as he was unemployed. He had been kicked out of the marital home and had ni choice but to stay with his sister in Somerset. She wasn't unemployed, in fact earnt very good money, and wouldn't pay anything. As soon as he was working he called her and suggested taking on the mortgage solely and getting tenants in to pay the mortgage.

It was only then that she told him she had handed the keys back and, as it transpires, forged his signature in order to do so. The lenders were chasing the arrears but had not threatened repossession at that point, and ALL legal advice that I've come across states that you must never habd the keys back, except as an absolute last resort. As he had no say, no idea and no choice in the proceedings, I don't really understand the responses ive had so far.

laurel7172

Well, OK then. He isn't liable. Tell the bank an anonymous poster on the internet says so.

This isn't a legal forum, but you've been told the law as we see it, and not without sympathy. There's no point getting cross because people can't tell you what you want to hear.

I suggest you see a solicitor. And I hope you'll be more polite.

TBagpuss

I'm a little confused as to why this s coming up know, if they separated, and she told him that she had returned the keys, in 2011? Did he speak to the mortgage company at all at the time he was told she'd returned the keys?

The basic position is that they had joint and several liability for the mortgage, so they were both liable for all of the shortfall. If the house was sold, then the remaining debt became an unsecured debt, so was wiped out for Ex by her bankruptcy.

Your husband remains liable.

The mortgage lender however may be at fault if they failed to take proper care to check the signatures. Had they been told that your husband and his ex had separated? Had your husband given them separate contact details?

He may have a valid complaint against the mortgage lender but if he were looking to get them to reduce or write off the debt I think he would have to show that they failed to take reasonable steps AND that he suffered loss as a result. If they had been told that he and his (then) wife were not together, then that may have put them on notice that they should have check the forms more carefully. However, given that at the time your husband was not working, and not paying the mortgage, he may struggle to convince anyone that he would not have consented had he known at the time.

It would, of course, be open to him to report the forgery. If he does, then he needs to be aware that he no longer has control over how it goes from then - the police may do nothing, (if they feel there is little chance of a conviction, or that it isn't in the public interest to pursue it) or they may do, but either way, it will be their decision, not his.

Has your husband made a complaint to the mortgage company?

depending on his current financial position, it may worth his while to look into making an offer to the company in full and final settlement.

TrickyDicky101

laurel7172 wrote: »

Well, OK then. He isn't liable. Tell the bank an anonymous poster on the internet says so.

This isn't a legal forum, but you've been told the law as we see it, and not without sympathy. There's no point getting cross because people can't tell you what you want to hear.

I suggest you see a solicitor. And I hope you'll be more polite.

I must be missing something because I can't see the OP being impolite (and I've re-read her last post above a couple of times).

OP, that doesn't change what's been said about your husband's position: he still owes the money with or without his signature.

clayer1970

I really didn't think I was being rude either. I'm cross at the situation, and the first reply came across as very short, but I certainly didn't intend to be rude, just clear up where it seemed there was confusion.

So much for go easy on the newbie post it.

Thanks to everyone else for your input though, it is appreciated. Not sure I'd use this site again however.

DaveTheMus

TBagpuss wrote: »

I'm a little confused as to why this s coming up know, if they separated, and she told him that she had returned the keys, in 2011?

It's coming up now because the OP wants a piece of the house that was handed back.....

Thrugelmir

clayer1970 wrote: »

She wasn't unemployed, in fact earnt very good money, and wouldn't pay anything.

Sorry this doesn't sound correct. If the ex almost immediately went bankrupt then there's far more to the tale. Having the property repossessed is one issue. Going bankrupt is another level. Certainly no personal benefit in doing so.

More than likely there's 2 sides to the story, of which you've heard only one version.

jcgalliard

clayer1970 wrote: »

I really didn't think I was being rude either. I'm cross at the situation, and the first reply came across as very short, but I certainly didn't intend to be rude, just clear up where it seemed there was confusion.

So much for go easy on the newbie post it.

Thanks to everyone else for your input though, it is appreciated. Not sure I'd use this site again however.

You need to consult a solicitor on this one - being rude and having a go at others on this forum is just out of order!